If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Well here are some results for the Vargas Stage III upgrade that has caused the N54 forum section to basically be engaged in chaos for the past few months. From accusations of vaporware, to comparison to single turbo upgrades, to countless other arguments the day has come and the Stage III Vargas Turbo upgrade dyno'd on 91 octane with no meth 572 horsepower to the rear wheels. This is with a Cobb flash tuned by BimmerBoost vendor Pro-Tuning Freaks.

Impressive? Yep, sure is and this seems to also be a 91 octane pump gas only world record for the N54. Now keep in mind this is just the beginning. What will it do with meth? What will do on E85? What will it do with race gas and big boost? What about different turbos? Sky appears to be the limit but for now this kind of performance on pump gas sure is a big boost (hah, get it?) to the N54 scene.

Congratulations to all involved, Vargas Turbo Tech, Pro-Tuning Freaks, Cobb, and just the N54 community as well. The impossible just became possible. Pictures, video, and dynograph below.

The transmission computer uses the load seen by the DME to calculate how hard the shifts need to be. This is in the 6HP21 documentation.

I think Jake is saying that if the DME is seeing an artificially lowered load value from a piggyback, it will not be able to tell the TCU that the load is as high as it is and to increase the firmness of the shifts.

I don't think anyone is saying the transmission will just be fine with double the stock torque. What Jake is saying is the transmission stands a much better chance at coping with the increased torque if it knows the torque is increased. This is especially true if the transmission has the Alpina flash update because that specific update is designed to deal with increased torque over the stock level.

Also please keep in mind that torque is what a transmission is rated in, not power. It is the torque that is important. 600 HP at 7000 rpm is not the same torque as 600 HP at 4500 rpm (450 vs. 700 ft. lbs. respectively)

Ok, most of that makes sense. We keep tossing words like "better" out there which is a little wishy washy. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

First off these are GREAT numbers. They are very nice and there is obviously ALOT of room to grow from here. As many of us know who come from the platforms outside this one these types of setups finally put us up where we belong... closer to being alongside everyone else.

As for this comment, not sure what you mean. We can send shuttles to space, we can cure terminal illness in medicine, yet RB said we can not bolt other than factory framed turbos to an N54? Odd. I think what you are confusing is what was said as simply not worth it (to me), therefore I could not endorse them personally. As an installer, mechanic, designer, and a front liner so to speak; my thoughts were that a setup like this it is like mashing 100lbs of potatoes into a 50lb sack. Can it be done? Sure. Is there a solution that could offer the same or similar performance with better fitment, a cleaner look, for less cost? Absolutely. There are pros and cons to everything, and to each their own how they wish to weigh each factor. Way back when (before Tony even presented himself) we had discussions on doing this and had discovered that this line of Garrets were very short turbos, which definitely helped mitigate some of the potato mashing. I give Tony mad props as he did a MAGNIFICENT job with this project. I do believe he did the best that can be done with the design and in my eyes once he gets a good induction on these turbos for the production round it will be a very complete and a very elegant kit which with further tuning will be an amazing street car.

Back on topic, I sincerely send out congrats to Vargas, and looking forward to further advancements. Without setups like this the platform would definitely remain stagnant as we have known it for years now, so this is an excellent opportunity for more pioneers to jump in there and figure out how to push things along even further much like those running ST kits. With that all respects are given.

Rob

Rob is that guy who says something can't be done until someone else does it. Then he says he never said that, and of course it can be done, just better then how they did it.

As far as the trans goes, only so much you can do through software.. after seeing how quickly mine went from no known issues to toast, the limit is going to be in the 500-550 range, even w/o dragstrip launches.

Rob is that guy who says something can't be done until someone else does it. Then he says he never said that, and of course it can be done, just better then how they did it.

LOLOLOLOL... you know who else says that? Shiv... lol

The NLS discussions were hilarious especially when he said; there is no use for NLS or launch control on a platform with two small turbos and a relatively large displacement. Then Dzenno comes up with a solution; Shiv buys it and says; well we made it work so all of a sudden it is very useful.... lololololol

For the record my goal is 500-500whp on low boost( until a legit tranny comes out if ever). And I don't take it to the strip and IMO I'm pretty easy on my car as far as getting on it. That being said we will see what happens once I'm there.

Nicely worded from Jay… as always… but not so accurate. Your current tuning is 25ish psi, but DME sees 21… similar to stacked setup in DME torque. We can change the torque calculated by the DME through ATR, as Terry figured out. The point of stacking (I don’t think anyone plans to use piggy alone) is to put you in the ballpark of the tuning goals, but have the piggy directly control certain parameters like boost and meth. Your approach to meth I don’t find very “elegant” when the failsafe prevents any boost. Will be interesting seeing what happens with your meth approach… it will take some time to realize if there are any issues. I don’t see any with E85 in the mix, but 91oct/meth, may cause any weaknesses to surface. There are 2 issues that could present a problem: failsafe and tune aggression per meth flow. DME is pretty good at reacting so far though.

Yes going fast is the goal and the only reason I make these comments is because I don’t want to see any issues arise that stall progress. I am now deciding whether to sell my n54 for e36 track car or up the HP with hybrids, single, or stg3. Once the other stg3 sets sell I’m sure there will be various approaches in tuning, but this will take some time. I want to see the best setup utilized now, but seems this won’t happen. Still very interested…

For the record the DME sees up to 22.5psi of actual boost with the 3.5bar map sensor in place. Right now we've got about 1.5-2.5psi on top of that through so called "cheating".

The DME, and in turn transmission, both see max currently supported load of 220. We don't run stock load targets or below stock on the flash while raising boost on the piggy. This approach is not the way to do things in the long run. Its a way that works well enough providing full visibility into what the tune is doing while awaiting a boost limit removal change from the Cobb end.

The only weakness exposed with meth is your posts about it. As a matter of fact, on the dyno last time while running on 91 octane and meth and hitting 600+whp we had HFS-4 failsafe trip due to its window (high/low) configuration. It caused all boost to be dumped as it should while the accelerator was still pinned to 99.x (all the way down) and throttle was wide open at 80.x% and actual boost drop without a single timing correction.

Good luck with the e36. Just don't drop an n54 in it. You won't see much use of it at 12psi

The DME, and in turn transmission, both see max currently supported load of 220. We don't run stock load targets or below stock on the flash while raising boost on the piggy.

All things a stacked setup would do… no one will be running stock load targets. I think you know this… I hope anyway.

Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks

awaiting a boost limit removal change from the Cobb end

it’s not a “boost limit”, but revised/added data points for DME setpoints and calcs… may take some time.

Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks

The only weakness exposed with meth is your posts about it. As a matter of fact, on the dyno last time while running on 91 octane and meth and hitting 600+whp we had HFS-4 failsafe trip due to its window (high/low) configuration. It caused all boost to be dumped as it should while the accelerator was still pinned to 99.x (all the way down) and throttle was wide open at 80.x% and actual boost drop without a single timing correction.

Do you know at point flow stopped (if it did)? Sometime before the WG opened I take it. And this was on a 91oct map w/ timing bumped 2deg… hardly mapped for meth.

All things a stacked setup would do… no one will be running stock load targets. I think you know this… I hope anyway.

What? LOL I don't think you understand what's being done to run the piggies in stacked setups in that case. Stacked setups don't target 220 load on the flash or anywhere near it. I'm not talking about what could've/should've/might've been done. I'm talking about what the current stacked setups DO today.

Originally Posted by JoshBoody

it’s not a “boost limit”, but revised/added data points for DME setpoints and calcs… may take some time.

Yes it may. The reason I refer to it as a boost limit is for simplicity purposes. Think I've actually said this before too and you probably know that as well, maybe not

Originally Posted by JoshBoody

Do you know at point flow stopped (if it did)? Sometime before the WG opened I take it. And this was on a 91oct map w/ timing bumped 2deg… hardly mapped for meth.

Anyway, keep the updates coming. And like always, I’m here to help.

Of course its not fully mapped for meth. We didn't start mapping for meth. We turned meth on to help the HPFP out and not have it nosedive. Then when we saw that work we had about 10mins to go. So we added 2 deg of timing to the map to see what it does in the last 10mins and if it maybe hits 600 (we were at 582whp at that point with meth on vs. 572whp without meth on ACN91, same map). Flow didn't "stop", failsafe was triggered due to the too aggressive failsafe configuration. It happend somewhere at high 5k rpm range. Tony adjusted the failsafe window/configuration slightly, ran again and we were in business with meth. Sadly we ran out of time and it was over. Another 2-3 hours that day on the dyno would've seen some nice meth/91 numbers just adding timing but time was up

What? LOL I don't think you understand what's being done to run the piggies in stacked setups in that case. Stacked setups don't target 220 load on the flash or anywhere near it. I'm not talking about what could've/should've/might've been done. I'm talking about what the current stacked setups DO today.

Stacked setups don’t target 220, cause few are running that much boost. I know how I tune a stacked setup and the possibilities... yes you can set max load. Terry only ran stock load targets with Cobb as a fix for some peeps flatlining. Otherwise you set the flash to the tuning ballpark. Setpoints today won’t transfer to stg3 running 50% more power… but the concept stays the same. This is a pointless discussion... you know how it works, but I guess just like to have the last word.

Stacked setups don’t target 220, cause few are running that much boost. I know how I tune a stacked setup and the possibilities... yes you can set max load. Terry only ran stock load targets with Cobb as a fix for some peeps flatlining. Otherwise you set the flash to the tuning ballpark. Setpoints today won’t transfer to stg3 running 50% more power… but the concept stays the same. This is a pointless discussion... you know how it works, but I guess just like to have the last word.

LOL Are you seriously explaining how to stack to me? I showed you how to do it when you and some other tuners said it was blasphemy...just like you said we'd never be able to tune the vargas stg3 with all the DME limits/load/torque targeting, just like you said above the stacked approach does the same as sending as close to true load to the TCU as we do today, just like you said in the past that piggies could do everything the DME could in terms of fuel control with just fuel pressure and o2 sensor biasing...please give up on those "facts"..all I'm asking for is stick to some data, hopefully of your own gather

You're the one jumping in for no reason into this thread and starting a debate when one is simply not needed. Its hard I guess when there's not much left to pick on

LOL Are you seriously explaining how to stack to me? I showed you how to do it when you and some other tuners said it was blasphemy...just like you said we'd never be able to tune the vargas stg3 with all the DME, just like you just said the stacked approach does the same as sending as close to true load to the TCU as we do today, just like you said piggies could do everything the DME could in terms of fuel control with just fuel pressure and o2 sensor biasing...please give up on those "facts" all I'm asking for and stick to some data and your own testing at the least before claiming facts

You're the one jumping in for no reason into this thread and starting a debate when one is simply not needed. Its hard I guess when there's not much left to pick on

Ha, I never said stacked wouldn’t work. You did it with JB first, I did it with Procede soon after… tried with OTS initially, but had to wait for ATR for it to be very useful. In some instances you have been on the modding forefront with this platform, but it doesn’t mean your approach is/has been the best. And I never said you couldn't tune stg3 with Cobb alone… I stated its NOT optimal for max HP and I still think this. Stacked can report very similar to actual loads to the DME… do you think Cobb alone is reporting the true loads? No its not with the increased VE. I can manipulate what torque values the DME/TCU sees independent of load… can you? It’s just a matter of understanding your tuning tools… sorry won’t help you out on this one (at least at this time). Piggy alone has very good fuel control, but there’s limits. With stacking (raising the limit) you would still use pressure bias, which works very well. Have to choose the best approach with the tools available.

Ha, I never said stacked wouldn’t work. You did it with JB first, I did it with Procede soon after… tried with OTS initially, but had to wait for ATR for it to be very useful. In some instances you have been on the modding forefront with this platform, but it doesn’t mean your approach is/has been the best. And I never said you couldn't tune stg3 with Cobb alone… I stated its NOT optimal for max HP and I still think this. Stacked can report very similar to actual loads to the DME… do you think Cobb alone is reporting the true loads? No its not with the increased VE. I can manipulate what torque values the DME/TCU sees independent of load… can you? It’s just a matter of understanding your tuning tools… sorry won’t help you out on this one (at least at this time). Piggy alone has very good fuel control, but there’s limits. With stacking (raising the limit) you would still use pressure bias, which works very well. Have to choose the best approach with the tools available.

And you're back

It'd be foolish to say/think my tuning approach has always been the best. Its an evolving process as it is with any platform/tuning solution(s). Everything on my end is simply results based while looking for the cleanest most elegant approaches that get the job without external electronics help.

For instance, current boost limit cheat isn't something I'd consider clean and can't wait until its properly addressed and that's why its a cheat (i.e. not elegant or 100% clean).

Going further, the heck does tuning with Cobb is not optimal for max HP mean? What is max HP and when did you or we see/say what that is or what it takes to get there?? I see you're again ready to attack something you don't understand yourself entirely.

And YES, I can and know how to change torque requests for any given load LOL rocket science! or is it brain surgery?

Lastly, there's absolutely no reason to bias the fuel pressure sensor signal for tuning any level of horsepower on this car. Maybe in your progressive meth/boost control world that may sound like an awesome feature. With a proper tune calibrated for a given octane it is simply useless, wrong and just shouldn't need to be done. Really, just one of the many things on the piggy cheatsheat

Adding duty cycle (my guess at your cheat) isn't much of a cheat really if you ask me. Just a headache if you released it like that because of everyone needing to be dialed in by hand for their conditions, and not so adaptable. JB+ would be less of a headache if Cobb doesn't release the maps by then, but for now it's not really a cheat imo, just a method of boost control. There are many methods of boost control.

I personally like the integrated approach. Who doesn't? I mean seriously it's usually the best way to handle things assuming whatever computer you're working with is sufficiently hacked.

I still think piggybacks are great for things that haven't been hacked into the DME yet, like flex fueling. Although a "true" set tune would of course be better for E85 even, the flexibility of the piggybacks are nice. It's like being spoiled with extra features you only wish the DME had.

Lastly, who tunes for "max hp" anyway? When you are building or tuning any project, you don't typically go for "max hp" unless you are a building a funnycar (read- don't mind rebuilding every single pass). What you do instead is target specific goals. 500hp with X spool, 800hp, etc. Reliability has to be taken into account. If you build blindly, you're gonna have a bad time. Trust me, I've done it because it's tempting.